Go to Google nGram Viewer and do a search for the term "intellectual property." It will basically show you that while it has been around a while, it wasn't until the 1976 Copyright Act that the term began to be used more widely and from 1983 to 1999 the use of the term exploded.
Now, link that timeline up with the development of the various forms of information technology, ranging from the PC through the Internet. The push for property rights is directly related to the invention of technology that relies on manipulating information, thus increasing the value of the information.
Easy to answer that. It's called public choice theory. Business concentrates on passing laws which benefit them, and the costs of those laws are passed on to society as a whole.
It's ridiculous that the derivative works right, originally meant to protect against someone converting a music score into a piano roll, now protects against anything that is even remotely based on an object already under copyright.
And there is no such thing as fair use when any use will get you sued. How is that fair?
It's not a coincidence
Go to Google nGram Viewer and do a search for the term "intellectual property." It will basically show you that while it has been around a while, it wasn't until the 1976 Copyright Act that the term began to be used more widely and from 1983 to 1999 the use of the term exploded.
Now, link that timeline up with the development of the various forms of information technology, ranging from the PC through the Internet. The push for property rights is directly related to the invention of technology that relies on manipulating information, thus increasing the value of the information.
Ay yay yay
When Jefferson said that eternal vigilence was the price of liberty, I'm pretty sure this is not what he meant.
Re:
Easy to answer that. It's called public choice theory. Business concentrates on passing laws which benefit them, and the costs of those laws are passed on to society as a whole.
Re:
It's a "monopoly" right, not a property right. The term "intellectual property" didn't even exist prior to 1980.
Might want to start putting that great access to "legal databases" to good use.
Seems like the contract for the cameras has a percentage of each of the tickets being kicked back to the camera manufacturer.
Great to know that a local government is ok with that. Why not next they kick back ticket revenue to patrol officers...
It's ridiculous that the derivative works right, originally meant to protect against someone converting a music score into a piano roll, now protects against anything that is even remotely based on an object already under copyright.
And there is no such thing as fair use when any use will get you sued. How is that fair?
Incredible
The worst part is that these are ex-parte subpoenas, meaning those whose names are being turned over are being stripped of due process.